Originally Posted by chuckvb
Thanks, That's what I thought, but mis-information messed me up. I've also read that the spyder2 is not accurate and that it is. I would be a casual user and It's available for under $60 It seems like it would be worth trying at that price.
The Spyder2 is widely commented as being less accurate than some of the other low cost devices (under $150). However, there is a point of diminishing returns. Human vision is extremely forgiving, and small variations in accuracy are nearly impossible to spot.
None of the low cost sensors will give you a "perfectly calibrated" zero deltaE deviation image (it is reasonable to expect to be within 3 deltaE IMHO). Most, if not all, of them will not give useful readings below 30IRE.
My experience - as a non-professional - has been that the sensor based calibration has helped me do a better job than I could have ever done by eye. The resulting image has been pleasing, but did take some getting used to. I've had a lot of fun learning about the technology.
My approach is - use the sensor to tweak. Verify results by eye. Iterate until I'm happy with both the sensor readings, and how it looks.